Why do you all have to use different formats?

Knowname · Post by **Knowname** » Fri Nov 11, 2005 10:47 pm

arzuro wrote:It would be feckin easy to agree on one kind of vehicle for each possible use. There is THE best car, THE best truck and THE best convertible. It just won't work because people are mostly jerks.

oh God, not THIS again... forgot to say I've only seen one video encoded for hdtv (like I think it was called something like i1080dvd or something like that) and it was .wmv. Extreme Terminator 2 super platinum uncut directors cut or something like that.

x_rex30 · Post by **x_rex30** » Fri Nov 11, 2005 11:15 pm

arzuro wrote:It would be feckin easy to agree on one kind of vehicle for each possible use. There is THE best car, THE best truck and THE best convertible. It just won't work because people are mostly jerks.

I love how you generalize things.

JaddziaDax · Post by **JaddziaDax** » Fri Nov 11, 2005 11:20 pm

x_rex30 wrote:
arzuro wrote:It would be feckin easy to agree on one kind of vehicle for each possible use. There is THE best car, THE best truck and THE best convertible. It just won't work because people are mostly jerks.
I love how you generalize things.

Either generalize or specify to death, theres no inbetween with this guy

ssj4lonewolf · Post by **ssj4lonewolf** » Fri Nov 11, 2005 11:49 pm

JaddziaDax wrote: 2. I am too lazy to learn .avi compression even though this site continues to rave or act like its the best...

3. its .WMV - and in Sony Vegas its the best quality to filesize ratio... keeps most of my files pretty small, while has a pretty clear quality... YUP I make .WMV look good

Hit the points on the head right there. I just dont fuckin know how to compress my shit, and im not going to go get another program to do it. Ill take my mpg2 and my wmv from vegas. I dont always have the best quality from it but it works most of the time.

SpringBoy · Post by **SpringBoy** » Sun Nov 13, 2005 12:00 pm

trythil wrote:Thank you for demonstrating a lack of knowledge of the difference between a video container, codec, and standards body.

I'm sorry but I feel I have to explain myself since you appear to not understand what I'm talking about.

trythil wrote:"MPEG" in its most general usage refers to a standards group. (Hence, the "G".) They define the specifications and interfaces for everything from MPEG-1 to XviD to x264, as well as a wide variety of video containers, decoding techniques, standards for media indexing, and a whole lot more.

I know that. However, I was obviously not talking about the standards group but the file type, seeing as that's what the original topic of discussion was about. You know, the files that commonly end in '.mpeg' or '.mpg'.

I even explicitly said that I was referring to MPEG-1 compression (the most common compression standard to put in an "MPEG file").

Would you have accused me of "demostrating a lack of knowledge" if I had referred to JPEG as a file type, when it is quite obviously a standards group just like MPEG?

trythil wrote:
SpringBoy wrote:Other than that I don't care if people use AVI, MKV, OGM, or whatever else as long as they use a good (and free) codec.
Matroska, OGM, and AVI are not codecs. They are only media containers.

I simply cannot see how you thought I was confusing a container for a codec here. Look at my quote! I said I don't care about containers as long as a good codec is used.

And if you thought I was confused about WMV or MOV - yes I realise that they're simply containers as well. WMV has a specific set of codecs that it supports but it is still a container. MOV is similar in that Apple have a core set of codecs that are supported by Quicktime (and hence guarenteed to be supported by a particular version).

I do actually have an idea what I'm talking about - you simply mis-interpreted what I was saying. Sorry if I wasn't clear or explicit enough for you.

I also apologise to the people who get good encodes out of Windows Media files if I came off too critical of the format's quality. I know that the codecs can get good results when applied properly. However, you have to admit that about 90% of the WMV files available for download here are from people who used WMM to encode - which isn't the best program for creating high quality videos.

Scintilla · Post by **Scintilla** » Sun Nov 13, 2005 12:34 pm

JaddziaDax wrote:2. I am too lazy to learn .avi compression even though this site continues to rave or act like its the best...

3. its .WMV - and in Sony Vegas its the best quality to filesize ratio... keeps most of my files pretty small, while has a pretty clear quality... YUP I make .WMV look good

You do know that you can put a WMV9 video stream in an AVI container (assuming you've got the WMV9 ACM, a free download from Microsoft's website), right?

Use WMV compression if you must, but it would still be preferable to use the AVI format for it, if only to avoid the stupid random seeking issues that the WMV format has (which is always my biggest complaint with the format).

I don't know about OGM support for WMV9, so I can't say anything about it.

Qyot27 · Post by **Qyot27** » Sun Nov 13, 2005 3:50 pm

Knowname wrote:what the hell is an mkv?? I thought mp4's were the bane of our existance but I've just played my first one ;p never met an mkv...

MKV = Matroska file. It's a container that supports using MPEG-4 Part 2, AVC, or others in a much cleaner fashion than using them in AVI. Same thing with different audio formats (like AAC or Vorbis).

There are some fansubs (Bleach, if I remember correctly) that have releases available in Matroska. For AMVs, very few use it. Mainly because most of the audience probably won't bother installing the support for it or getting stand-alone programs capable of playing it back (like VLC Player or mplayer).

These are just about the only (link's down) ones I've seen that use it, barring three of my own.

Scintilla wrote:I don't know about OGM support for WMV9, so I can't say anything about it.

It doesn't support it. At least not the WMV9 VCM. The two times I just tried encoding something with it using VDubMod it failed to play back at all.

Scintilla · Post by **Scintilla** » Sun Nov 13, 2005 5:29 pm

Qyot27 wrote:WMV9 VCM

Dough. Replace that "ACM" in my last post with "VCM"... I knew I had screwed something up.

devilmaykickass · Post by **devilmaykickass** » Sun Nov 13, 2005 6:00 pm

I use Xvid because, from what I've seen, it's capable of the lowest filesize with the best quality and the largest amount of people willing to watch. WMV9 is actually capable of smaller filesizes with compotent quality due to the fact that it can compress audio more than mp3 before it's noticable.

Plus Xvid is just easy to use.

pen-pen2002 · Post by **pen-pen2002** » Sun Nov 13, 2005 10:36 pm

devilmaykickass wrote:I use Xvid because, from what I've seen, it's capable of the lowest filesize with the best quality and the largest amount of people willing to watch. WMV9 is actually capable of smaller filesizes with compotent quality due to the fact that it can compress audio more than mp3 before it's noticable.

Plus Xvid is just easy to use.

I treid to show my videos to a fellow AMV editor (who has never heard of this site

) only to be thrwarted when she did not have Xvid and did not want to download it and "clutter up her computer." I tried to explain that Xvid is just a simple binary, while her DivX player was a far more invasive program to no avail.

And I thought that AMV's would finally come in handy in impressing someone of the opposite gender. So foolish...